6 ms·

> Liu Cixin's The Three Body Problem His vision of the future is bleak in the extreme. His characters are naively constructed and occasionally make incomprehen

> Liu Cixin's The Three Body Problem His vision of the future is bleak in the extreme. His characters are naively constructed and occasionally make incomprehensible choices. The worst sin is he's unsure whether he wants to write hard sci-fi or just mostly "fi" with a thin veneer of "sci". Occasionally he seems like he wants to stick to solid science with a few extra assumptions (in the best tradition of hard sci-fi); but then he veers off into some cartoonish "science" that's quite jarring. In the end, you get the impression he just tries to brag about how much science he "understands". In the end I was reading it the way some folks watch a bad movie - to make fun of it. If you want cosmic scale hard sci-fi, try Stephen Baxter. He can be a bit dry at times, but that's his only fault.

pasabagi 8y ago
I'm completely with you. It baffles me how many people loved Liu Cixin's book. It's written like a 70's era 'ideas, no execution' sci-fi novel, but the ideas are terrible. I mean, the central 'xeno-anthropology' thing, that's treated as like a deeply profound maths proof, is kinda a brain fart. If you read a writer like Peter Tchaikovsky, you get actually interesting ideas, and really good execution. And I'd say PT is pretty mid-range for contemporary sci-fi authors. People like Yoon Ha Lee or China Mieville are really pushing the genre forward. Lui Cixin's work on the other hand reads like one of those 70's books about uplifted dolphins and sexy spacewomen, all robotic characterization and uninspired writing.
- Florin_Andrei 8y ago
  > It baffles me how many people loved Liu Cixin's book. If this is the first sci-fi book you read, and especially if this happens at an early-ish age, I imagine it may seem impressive.
- natosaichek 8y ago
  I think you mean Adrian Tchaikovsky, right? Peter was a great composer of music, but not SF. Where would you recommend someone start with Adrian Tchaikovsky?
  - pasabagi 8y ago
    Yeah - oh man, I'm terrible with names. Adrian Tchaikovsky's a really good execution guy - fantastic standalone novels, not with anything especially out there, but really well done. I was really impressed by The Freeze Frame Revolution, and Children of Time was also good. His fantasy stuff is pretty uninspired, though.
atombender 8y ago
Personally, I actually liked the ideas, but everything else was a complete disaster. The book is written in a very simple, juvenile style, at the linguistic level of a YA novel. There's zero depth to any characters. By modern standards, it's all "tell", no "show". I've read several reviews that suggest this is actually how most modern Chinese novels are written. That doesn't make it more readable, unfortunately. The style seemed rather unintentionally surreal. My sense after reading was that I had just been reading Vonnegut's "The Sirens of Titan" but without any of the humour. Many of Vonnegut's books are breezy, somewhat outrageous fables that don't go very deep into their characters, of course, but they work because they're funny, colourful, inventive, well written, and are full of great ideas. I think Lui Cixin's book would have worked much better as a Vonnegut-style satire. If you want a similarly dark look at the future of humanity's role in the universe, take a look at Peter Watts' Blindsight [1]. While it certainly won't win any prizes for literature, and it has some odd quirks, it's considerably better written, and might especially appeal to fans of Neal Stephenson's loose, ragged style of writing. Moreover, it's probably the creepiest sci-fi novel I've read. On the surface it's a somewhat straightforward story about a team of transhuman specialists who are dispatched to investigate an apparently alien artifact. But it goes deep into some fairly cynical ideaas about human consciousness that are somewhat existentially unnerving. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Blindsight-Firefall-Book-Peter-Watts-ebook/dp/B003K15EKM/ https://www.amazon.com/Blindsight-Firefall-Book-Peter-Watts-...
- asark 8y ago
  Second the recommendation for Blindsight. It's competently written (I don't mean that as faint praise) and has a darkness to it that's substantial enough to stick with you for a good long while. You're right that the prose is a little Stephenson-ish, but to avoid giving anyone the wrong impression I'd add that the pace, story, structure, and—how to put this?—evenness of quality aren't.
  - atombender 8y ago
    Agreed, the pacing was great, and he really landed the ending, which is something of a rare feat in sci-fi. The only thing I didn't particularly enjoy was the flashbacks to the protagonist's past on Earth, which seemed a bit trite and repetitive.

pasabagi 8y ago

I'm completely with you. It baffles me how many people loved Liu Cixin's book. It's written like a 70's era 'ideas, no execution' sci-fi novel, but the ideas are terrible. I mean, the central 'xeno-anthropology' thing, that's treated as like a deeply profound maths proof, is kinda a brain fart. If you read a writer like Peter Tchaikovsky, you get actually interesting ideas, and really good execution. And I'd say PT is pretty mid-range for contemporary sci-fi authors. People like Yoon Ha Lee or China Mieville are really pushing the genre forward. Lui Cixin's work on the other hand reads like one of those 70's books about uplifted dolphins and sexy spacewomen, all robotic characterization and uninspired writing.

Florin_Andrei 8y ago
> It baffles me how many people loved Liu Cixin's book. If this is the first sci-fi book you read, and especially if this happens at an early-ish age, I imagine it may seem impressive.
natosaichek 8y ago
I think you mean Adrian Tchaikovsky, right? Peter was a great composer of music, but not SF. Where would you recommend someone start with Adrian Tchaikovsky?
- pasabagi 8y ago
  Yeah - oh man, I'm terrible with names. Adrian Tchaikovsky's a really good execution guy - fantastic standalone novels, not with anything especially out there, but really well done. I was really impressed by The Freeze Frame Revolution, and Children of Time was also good. His fantasy stuff is pretty uninspired, though.

atombender 8y ago

Personally, I actually liked the ideas, but everything else was a complete disaster. The book is written in a very simple, juvenile style, at the linguistic level of a YA novel. There's zero depth to any characters. By modern standards, it's all "tell", no "show". I've read several reviews that suggest this is actually how most modern Chinese novels are written. That doesn't make it more readable, unfortunately. The style seemed rather unintentionally surreal. My sense after reading was that I had just been reading Vonnegut's "The Sirens of Titan" but without any of the humour. Many of Vonnegut's books are breezy, somewhat outrageous fables that don't go very deep into their characters, of course, but they work because they're funny, colourful, inventive, well written, and are full of great ideas. I think Lui Cixin's book would have worked much better as a Vonnegut-style satire. If you want a similarly dark look at the future of humanity's role in the universe, take a look at Peter Watts' Blindsight [1]. While it certainly won't win any prizes for literature, and it has some odd quirks, it's considerably better written, and might especially appeal to fans of Neal Stephenson's loose, ragged style of writing. Moreover, it's probably the creepiest sci-fi novel I've read. On the surface it's a somewhat straightforward story about a team of transhuman specialists who are dispatched to investigate an apparently alien artifact. But it goes deep into some fairly cynical ideaas about human consciousness that are somewhat existentially unnerving. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Blindsight-Firefall-Book-Peter-Watts-ebook/dp/B003K15EKM/ https://www.amazon.com/Blindsight-Firefall-Book-Peter-Watts-...

asark 8y ago
Second the recommendation for Blindsight. It's competently written (I don't mean that as faint praise) and has a darkness to it that's substantial enough to stick with you for a good long while. You're right that the prose is a little Stephenson-ish, but to avoid giving anyone the wrong impression I'd add that the pace, story, structure, and—how to put this?—evenness of quality aren't.
- atombender 8y ago
  Agreed, the pacing was great, and he really landed the ending, which is something of a rare feat in sci-fi. The only thing I didn't particularly enjoy was the flashbacks to the protagonist's past on Earth, which seemed a bit trite and repetitive.